Moderation of 'off topic' discussions in technical threads

[El Salsero Gringo]

I smell the heavy, heavy hand of a moderator deciding this witty repartee deserves a thread of its own. I don't know which particular moderator is responsible for that bit of idiocy, but if you don't want it in the thread it was posted in, please just delete the whole damn lot.

Edit: I see DavidJames owns up to the idiocy then. Nice one. Just delete it instead.

[David Bailey]

Sorry, I was just trying to keep the moderator thread on-track...

I'll go and hide on the naughty step for a bit...

P.S. If you think this is heavy-handed, you should see the MJDA forum

[El Salsero Gringo]

Sorry, I was just trying to keep the moderator thread on-track...

I'll go and hide on the naughty step for a bit...

I think you'll kill all the fun chit-chat at the end of threads if every bloody time it's moderated into a new headlining thread. And for what?

P.S. If you think this is heavy-handed, you should see the MJDA forum

No thanks. I can't afford to lose the hefty deposit you have to put down as an incentive not to stray off topic.

Now we're back on the topic of moderating (and way off-topic from "ESG's Stupid Publishing Empire" or whatever you called this one) what are you going to do? Cut-and-paste this *back* into the first thread? Or start a third?

[David Bailey]

I think you'll kill all the fun chit-chat at the end of threads if every bloody time it's moderated into a new headlining thread. And for what?

That particular topic is in the "technical discussion" area, so extensive chit-chat is probably not helpful. I'd like to keep that thread as information-rich and banter-light as possible, because I think it's useful to explain the whole "what do moderators do" thing. That's why I split my own "Pratchett" stuff out of it.

I certainly have no intention of moderating most other threads that way, but that area (and that thread in particular) is more of a "help" section than a "discussion" area, in my opinion.

I could be wrong.

[Twirly]

So, what do you think is the likelihood of a concerted effort to chatter on said thread now DJ?!

[El Salsero Gringo]

That particular topic is in the "technical discussion" area, so extensive chit-chat is probably not helpful. I'd like to keep that thread as information-rich and banter-light as possible, because I think it's useful to explain the whole "what do moderators do" thing. That's why I split my own "Pratchett" stuff out of it.

I certainly have no intention of moderating most other threads that way, but that area (and that thread in particular) is more of a "help" section than a "discussion" area, in my opinion.

OK Boss, you're the Boss, Boss. Probably a good idea to copy that answer back into the original thread then, no? It's information-rich too. I hope I'm not giving you a headache.

I could be wrong.

No you can't - you're a moderator now.

[CJ]

Sorry, I was just trying to keep the moderator thread on-track...

I'll go and hide on the naughty step for a bit...

P.S. If you think this is heavy-handed, you should see the MJDA forum

Are Ceroc employees allowed to contribute to other fora?!?!?!?

[Franck]

I smell the heavy, heavy hand of a moderator deciding this witty repartee deserves a thread of its own. I don't know which particular moderator is responsible for that bit of idiocy, but if you don't want it in the thread it was posted in, please just delete the whole damn lot.

I would like to see more moderation / splitting of threads that go off topic, in the last year or so, we've not had the man-power to implement it, but as DavidJames explained, the technical sections would benefit greatly from being kept on topic.
I would rather the posts weren't deleted either, moving them to Chit Chat in a new thread or in a dedicated 'random chat' thread is the best solution, but if you disagree with the choice of title for the thread, you can report the post and ask us to change it to something more suitable.

I would happily own up to

that bit of idiocy

as I would have done the same, unfortunately I was too slow!

I will however move that 'moderation discussion' into its own thread now!

[Dreadful Scathe]

I smell the heavy, heavy hand of a moderator

He might have washed it.

go on then MrJames, split this off into a "DavidJames explaining his moderating heavy handidness thread" just append the number in brackets every time you do this.

e.g.

"DavidJames explaining his moderating heavy handidness thread (432)"

[El Salsero Gringo]

I would rather the posts weren't deleted either, moving them to Chit Chat in a new thread or in a dedicated 'random chat' thread is the best solution, but if you disagree with the choice of title for the thread, you can report the post and ask us to change it to something more suitable.

In which case we must consider ourselves warned that any random rubbish quip or retort you make buried at the back of a thread is possible or likely to be the first post in a new thread, with your name on it and a random title according to whim to boot. If that's policy, so be it, but the less anarchic this place is the less fun too. Who knows, you might see ChrisA back on here yet!

[David Franklin]

Sorry, I was just trying to keep the moderator thread on-track...

I'll go and hide on the naughty step for a bit...

P.S. If you think this is heavy-handed, you should see the MJDA forum

I'm all for keeping stuff out of the 'serious' threads, but the thread splitting is pretty confusing. Maybe you could add a link to the parent thread so that people can get some context as to where the split occurred.

if you don't want it in the thread it was posted in, please just delete the whole damn lot.

In general, splitting a thread seems more 'gentle' moderation than deleting it entirely. On the other hand, if this thread is an example, it's not like deleting everything would actually lose much...

[Lynn]

In which case we must consider ourselves warned that any random rubbish quip or retort you make buried at the back of a thread is possible or likely to be the first post in a new thread, with your name on it and a random title according to whim to boot. If that's policy, so be it, but the less anarchic this place is the less fun too. Who knows, you might see ChrisA back on here yet!

I recall I split a thread on my second ever post. It was about 3 posts in a row off topic and someone split it into a new thread (I was new to forums and had no idea where my post had gone at first!). So this is not a 'new' pattern on the forum. The forum has grown a lot in numbers over the past few years with the same amount of moderators so that level of moderation became unworkable.

One or two totally off topic comments, the odd bit of banter - that's fine. A new discussion - that deserves a new thread.

And if it means dance discussion threads stay on topic - then thats a Good Thing.

[El Salsero Gringo]

I'm all for keeping stuff out of the 'serious' threads, but the thread splitting is pretty confusing. Maybe you could add a link to the parent thread so that people can get some context as to where the split occurred.

Hear hear. And a link from the parent thread in case anyone's going the other way would be nice too.

In general, splitting a thread seems more 'gentle' moderation than deleting it entirely. On the other hand, if this thread is an example, it's not like deleting everything would actually lose much...

[MartinHarper]

any random rubbish quip or retort you make buried at the back of a thread is possible or likely to be the first post in a new thread, with your name on it and a random title according to whim to boot. If that's policy, so be it, but the less anarchic this place is the less fun too.

Oh, I think having random quips/retorts headlining new threads with random titles is pretty anarchic.

Keep your chit-chat to the chit-chat areas, and you won't have a problem.

[David Bailey]

So, what do you think is the likelihood of a concerted effort to chatter on said thread now DJ?!

It depends on how much people see this as a contest between moderators and posters, and how much people see it as a collaborative forum in which we all try to keep to reasonable guidelines.

There are more moderators now, so there will likely be more moderation. This is, I believe, a Good Thing within reason, as it hopefully means the place will be a bit more friendly, a bit less out of control, and a bit more welcoming, especially to new starters.

I could be wro- oh hold on, no I couldn't

[David Franklin]

Hear hear. And a link from the parent thread in case anyone's going the other way would be nice too.

Although seeing as I couldn't find the fscking parent thread, I couldn't check if DJ had already done that...

It depends on how much people see this as a contest between moderators and posters, and how much people see it as a collaborative forum in which we all try to keep to reasonable guidelines.

I agree with your sentiment, but during a period of shall we say, flux in moderation policy, I think you have to expect more feedback than usual.

However, I would rather that feedback took the form of constructive criticism, and ideally positive suggestions. A war with the moderators is the last thing we need.

[David Bailey]

Although seeing as I couldn't find the fscking parent thread, I couldn't check if DJ had already done that...

Hmmm... I think there's a "leave link to child thread" function, which we could use. I don't think there's a reverse function, that'd have to be done manually, which'd be a bit of a pain but I guess could be done.

I agree with your sentiment, but during a period of shall we say, flux in moderation policy, I think you have to expect more feedback than usual.

Feedback is always good - and I think we've had a lot of that over the past week* on moderation, which is helping to shape such policy (I think it's not giving away too much secret information to say that up until now, the "moderation policy" has been "Ask Franck".)

* Hmm, coincidentally, that feedback's all been received over the same time I've been a moderator, maybe people are trying to tell me something

[CeeCee]

originally posted by El Salsero Gringo
I smell the heavy, heavy hand of a moderator...

originally posted by DavidJames
P.S. If you think this is heavy-handed ...

Splitting posts is a serious business and should not be undertaken "unadvisedly, lightly or wantonly" (solemnization of matrimony from the 1995 BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice)

I still haven't recovered from the indignation of having my post severed on another forum.

It was a forum which discussed dancing almost exclusively. It was serious. I enjoyed it, contributed and encouraged others to join in. I was inspired to start a thread for the first time ever. It didn't have time to go "off topic" because within minutes, my first post was severed and the amputated portions were used to spawn other threads, changing my original intention in the process. I was furious.

The first I knew about it was when other people asked me why my post had been massacred. We were all confused. The unnecessary interference from the moderator was beyond our comprehension.

I'm not known for requiring assistance with my literary skills, self expression or clarity of thought, nor had any 'rules' been broken.

I haven't posted on that forum since the incident and am happy to stay here because at least here we can be ourselves.


I feel so much better now that I've got that off my chest.

[TheTramp]

Are you allowed to name and shame other forums? Which one was that then?

[El Salsero Gringo]

Splitting posts is a serious business and should not be undertaken "unadvisedly, lightly or wantonly" (solemnization of matrimony from the 1995 BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice)

You tell him, CeeCee. He might listen to you!